Why Did The “Democrat” Governor Of Missouri Put Captain Ron Johnson In Charge of Ferg

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

A disturbing series of events is surfacing. During the Trayvon Martin narrative in 2012, one of the challenges for the concentric circle of manipulators who sought to construct a false dynamic, intention and motive for George Zimmerman was the facts running counter to their chosen narrative.

Anyone who focused on facts needed to be removed in order for the narrative to advance.

Toward that end in Sanford Florida (2012) the Police Chief, Bill Lee, was removed from authority; then the local prosecutor, Norm Wolfinger, was removed; eventually the local lead Detective, Chris Serino, was removed and replaced with State investigators working for the new “special prosecutor” Angela Corey.

When you are constructing a ruse -based on faulty and imperfect details- control becomes the primary factor. Everything must be controlled.

In 2012 anything not specifically controlled by those who are shaping events is considered a “risk”. That “risk” is why a Grand Jury was never used in the Zimmerman case. The facts and the grand jury were a risk because they specifically ran counter to the claims being advanced. That’s also why you never saw the results of the FBI investigation into the Zimmerman case – because that investigation showed there was ZERO substance to the claims being made.

...So why is Captain Ron Johnson, selected by a Democrat governor, approved by Eric Holder and the DOJ, and then put into place?

On its face, that sentiment expressed by Ron Johnson, and pushed by the racial grievance industry through professional race baiter Michael Skolnik might seem disingenuous. But you need to look beyond the surface to understand why “this man”, is considered by the constructionists to be the “best man”.

Here’s an example of construction and media assistance in controlling/editing.

Captain Ron Johnson marching with the “protesters” as displayed by New York Magazine, along with the accompanying script:

But here is another angle showing you what they cut out, to control the narrative:

Yes, it’s a little troubling to see the Captain of the Highway Patrol walking shoulder to shoulder with the notorious “Bloods” street gang.

That fact doesn’t help the narrative.

That fact must be controlled.

So that fact is cut out.

Here’s another example. In this example you see New Black Panther leader Malik Shabaaz leading the crowd in a chant of kill officer Darren Wilson:

Who do we want? Darren Wilson – How do we want him? DEAD.

Yikes. That’s troubling. But yet who was standing right beside the Black Panthers?

Who was right there listening to what was taking place ?

Now go back and look at that original statement from Ron Johnson again...

…..And ask yourself the original question:
Why did they put Captain Ron Johnson in charge of Ferguson Missouri ?

Remember, control, not facts, is the key element in creating -and maintaining- the ruse.

Control: Remove the police chief. Remove the local investigators. Remove the prosecutor….. ie. remove the facts.

All of this is more that very disturbing. I have suspected for a while that the media has been in cahoots with the government when it comes to control of a narrative that does not necessarily hold up to the facts of an event but promotes some liberal agenda. In that respect the whole article makes complete sense. Usually I live by the philosophy that I never blame on malice what can be explained by stupidity but things like this throw a wrench in to that view.

“Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet.”
James "Mad Dog" Mattis

All of this is more that very disturbing. I have suspected for a while that the media has been in cahoots with the government when it comes to control of a narrative that does not necessarily hold up to the facts of an event but promotes some liberal agenda. In that respect the whole article makes complete sense. Usually I live by the philosophy that I never blame on malice what can be explained by stupidity but things like this throw a wrench in to that view.

The government dog is wagging the media tail/tale.

I originally thought we wouldn't see anything like this in 2014 because it's not a presidential election year. However, perhaps the powers behind the golfer-in-chief are more terrified about losing the Senate than they are letting on. Because we have the usual suspects in this case--Crump, the Black Panthers, NBC, Sharpton, etc.--I am inclined to believe that this is being run by the same people and in the same way as the Trayvon Martin media lie. I am sure we will find out that a powerful public relations firm (maybe Ryan Jellison, again) is behind media campaign. I would also not be surprised to find out that Brown's family is involved in drug dealing (like Tracy Martin, a former gang member). We are already seeing evidence suppressed and what Sundance at the Conservative Treehouse calls "media evidence" being created.

My question is why.

I remember CUers asking why the Michigan self-defense case was not being covered by the M$M nor being given the same treatment as Trayvon, even though the shooter was definitely white and the victim a black woman. I said I thought because there was no money to be made and because it was not a presidential election year. But, since the Brown case is being created as we speak, there's obviously more to it.

Yes, I think the midterms are playing some part.
Yes, I think the desire to foment racial unrest is playing a part.
And yes, there are shakedown artists who plan to sue the city, the PD, etc. and make money off it.

But I can't help think there's something else here. If the golfer-in-chief and his servile media wanted a race case, why not Wafer in Michigan? Is the Missouri Senate election that important? Either case would have served the purpose, and Wafer was actually found guilty. (I disagree with the verdict, but I think gender played a role.)

The one thread of similarity between Trayvon and Brown is that they were both drug dealers who posted photos of themselves making gang signs. Trayvon came from a family with a criminal history (Tracy Martin was also in a gang.) Does the Federal government have a vested interest in protecting drug dealers? Or, even worse, does the Federal government have a vested interest in destroying the lives of innocent people who kill drug dealers in self defense? Because that is the net effect here: to destroy completely the lives of Zimmerman (who was actually innocent) and of Officer Williams (who may very well be). What part do police officers like Ron Johnson play in protecting the drug trade?

In the first place, the media has a template that shapes the initial reports -- a template as false as it is incendiary. The slain young black man is always initially described as an honor student and a saint and is pictured as a very young, presumably fragile, boy. When the truth that he was something of a thug comes out and that he was quite a bit older and larger than pictured, the damage has already largely been done. Political figures rush in to make fair trials more difficult and prospective jury pools are invariably tainted. So it is here, where the slain man hardly fits the preferred media “narrative”. Michael Brown was over six feet tall (6’4” in some accounts; 6’6” in others) and around 300 pounds.)

In the second place, the initial eyewitness accounts given press play are fatally flawed or contradictory. In this case, the first account is from Dorian Johnson, who admitted only after the police release of a video of the event that he was an accomplice of Brown’s in a strong-arm robbery just minutes before. His account of the cop trying to pull the 300-pound Brown through the window of his car strains credulity even before the robbery video shone a new light on the events preceding the shooting.

In the third place, what the press describes as “civil rights protests” and “vigils” are unaccountably held in liquor and appliance stores and the looting and burning of the shops in the area are by some mysterious magical thinking supposed to show the moral rightness of the protesters’ cause. In fact, they only harden attitudes against them.

In the fourth place, the press seems to think we’ve forgotten the way the Tawana Brawley, Duke LaCrosse, and Trayvon Martin cases which they hyped, and the Skip Gates incident fell apart under genuine, impartial scrutiny. Most of us over 15 are not so easily misled. (Indications from the continuing release of credible information suggest that this matter will follow suit in time.)

In the fifth place, Obama pals Sharpton and Jackson, and Holder’s community agitators from the Department of Justice, succeed only in stirring up hatred and fattening the pockets of the bereaved and their lawyers at the expense of both the black communities they infest and the community as a whole. If these people cared about young black men they’d concentrate on the overwhelming and soaring number of black on black murders and on reversing the administration’s economic policies driving these young men further into poverty. ..

I originally thought we wouldn't see anything like this in 2014 because it's not a presidential election year. However, perhaps the powers behind the golfer-in-chief are more terrified about losing the Senate than they are letting on. Because we have the usual suspects in this case--Crump, the Black Panthers, NBC, Sharpton, etc.--I am inclined to believe that this is being run by the same people and in the same way as the Trayvon Martin media lie. I am sure we will find out that a powerful public relations firm (maybe Ryan Jellison, again) is behind media campaign. I would also not be surprised to find out that Brown's family is involved in drug dealing (like Tracy Martin, a former gang member). We are already seeing evidence suppressed and what Sundance at the Conservative Treehouse calls "media evidence" being created.

My question is why.

I remember CUers asking why the Michigan self-defense case was not being covered by the M$M nor being given the same treatment as Trayvon, even though the shooter was definitely white and the victim a black woman. I said I thought because there was no money to be made and because it was not a presidential election year. But, since the Brown case is being created as we speak, there's obviously more to it.

Yes, I think the midterms are playing some part.
Yes, I think the desire to foment racial unrest is playing a part.
And yes, there are shakedown artists who plan to sue the city, the PD, etc. and make money off it.

But I can't help think there's something else here. If the golfer-in-chief and his servile media wanted a race case, why not Wafer in Michigan? Is the Missouri Senate election that important? Either case would have served the purpose, and Wafer was actually found guilty. (I disagree with the verdict, but I think gender played a role.)

The one thread of similarity between Trayvon and Brown is that they were both drug dealers who posted photos of themselves making gang signs. Trayvon came from a family with a criminal history (Tracy Martin was also in a gang.) Does the Federal government have a vested interest in protecting drug dealers? Or, even worse, does the Federal government have a vested interest in destroying the lives of innocent people who kill drug dealers in self defense? Because that is the net effect here: to destroy completely the lives of Zimmerman (who was actually innocent) and of Officer Williams (who may very well be). What part do police officers like Ron Johnson play in protecting the drug trade?

I think that one answer maybe a simple one. Dial up national racial tensions close to the mid terms and fire up the black voting bloc. Then rehash the Republican party as the party of whitey and the 'man who is keeping them down' and let matters take care of themselves.

“Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet.”
James "Mad Dog" Mattis

I think that one answer maybe a simple one. Dial up national racial tensions close to the mid terms and fire up the black voting bloc. Then rehash the Republican party as the party of whitey and the 'man who is keeping them down' and let matters take care of themselves.

If it's that simple, then why not go after Theodore Wafer in Michigan? They could stoked the anti-gun crowd too. The victim was a black female, not a thug, and had just been in a car accident. That seems like a far more sympathetic victim than a 6'4" (or 6'6") thug who had just robbed a convenience store.

I think that one answer maybe a simple one. Dial up national racial tensions close to the mid terms and fire up the black voting bloc. Then rehash the Republican party as the party of whitey and the 'man who is keeping them down' and let matters take care of themselves.

Their problem is there are no Republicans involved.

Say your prayers tonight. My source, who has direct law enforcement connections there, said that she was told that there probably will be at least 2000 people out there. Last night, when supposedly one shot was fired at the police, actually there were volleys of shots fired and the cops weren't allowed to defend themselves, were ordered by Johnson to stand down. They had to dodge the bullets.

Apparently the various police groups aren't getting along, much dissension there. To understand this you have to understand the composition of St Louis. The City of St Louis years ago forever bound themselves to a strict city limit. They are land locked, can't expand. There are probably over 80-100 municipalities there, a total patchwork of government.

St Louis County Police Dept overlays the smaller municipalities' police dept. Some have their own small police departments, others have none. Some of the areas are unincorporated so the County Police has jurisdiction there.

With the state and feds grabbing power, they're running the show. That runs counter to the independent police depts.

From what I heard they're begging for assistance tonight, even asking folks outside the realm of St Louis County to come in. Sounds like they're going to be on their own as no one wants to get involved.

Add to this the rabble rousers who are going to stir them up. Heard that the exit from the interstate to one of the streets in the area leading into Ferguson is almost closed from all the cars exiting. I doubt if you'll see the real news.

People have been hired to defend some of the stores as the police won't help.

Who would think this is America? This touches me as it's close to where I went to school, long ago when it was a decent part of town, near where I taught high school English. My family and friends are still in the St Louis area. I'm worried to death about my son who of all things is dogsitting in Ferguson tonight.

Here's a clip sent to me by a friend in St Louis tonight. Don't watch it if you're offended by some rough language. I don't advocate the N word, but it's a young black woman in Florida saying it.

‎" To the world you are just one more person, but to a rescued pet, you are the world.""A Nation of Sheep Breeds a Government of Wolves!"